Beatnik

I do it all the time with a square as well. Especially when training other jumpers on canopy skills, flying in formation and camera. It doesn't matter which canopy you are under, this is not a difficult thing to do.

I wouldn't worry about it. If you do a search you will see that the percentages have been posted before and you can see all the other manufacturers. From my experience with gear, the military discounts are pretty similar to dealer rates. There are some companies that don't have anything in stone but if you mention that you are in the military they discount it a bit. As for the poster above talking about not advertising the discounts, I don't think it is that big of a deal and it has been posted before. Most manufacturers if you ask them they usually tell you without proof of military service. The only time they seem to want proof is when you are buying.

You seem to be pretty determined to prove that kicking does nothing when suspended under canopy. I will leave my knowledge on the subject out of this because there has been one with a great deal of physics knowledge than mine try to tell you different and you refute it. So instead, I am just going to pose a simple and small challenge to you. Next time you are under canopy try kicking yourself into a line twist. By your theories it can't be done and if you can report back and explain it. If still are determined to say it does nothing, then I must have done something super special when I kicked myself into a line twist for a photo.

Sweat seems to be a large factor with canopies. A friend of mine in Brazil says that centre cells are worn out quickly there and they suspect it is because it is hot and a lot of people pack without shirts on.

If you want to get technical, F-111 is actually a stronger material than ZP is. This is due to the process that impregnates silicon into the ZP material. The ZP doesn't increase in porosity which why the canopies are lasting longer. A ZP canopy is maintaining its flight characteristics longer than an F-111. So regular maintenance (e.g. relining) will allow for a longer life with a ZP canopy compared to F-111. Softer openings with newer canopies are due to the way they are being designed not much to do with the material itself. Your information was along the right tracks.

The best advice I could give you as an instructor is go talk to your instructors, they know you and your skill set best, and see what they say. Getting advice from people you don't know and don't know you isn't the best. That said, if you were one of my students and going on an assumption that you are switched on and are competent, I would say it is a good choice. But I don't know you so take this for what it is worth.

I was asking you not anyone else and you shouldn't be speaking for anyone else. Back tracking on your answers and trying to play on the wording is not helping you case at all. What does staying away and staying away completely mean and what is the difference? It doesn't appear that there is any. You either stay away from something or you don't. There is an in between and able to satisfy its definition. Like I mentioned before your opinion on the product is clear and you don't have to restate it. I asked if your instance with the product should discredit all the happy users and proven cases with the product. You have been unable to answer that and keep coming to back to things that have no relevance and/or bearing to the question. All that seems to be coming from you is an emotional response with no logical or factual backing. If you want to stay away from a product fine but don't try to convince others to stay away from a good product just because you don't like it. If you have factual evidence and/or many accounts of something not working, that is a different story. Then provide it and give a concrete argument. What I mean by many cases is something where the majority of people, 50% + 1, are having problems. One or two percent of cases doesn't have enough weight to justify that something is a bad product. Leave your emotional responses out of it.

I personally do think there is anything wrong or odd with this photo. It looks like standard line twists. Most of the time we don't see a visual representation of line twists so I think that makes it look a little strange. Lines being twisted together above and below the main twist is very common. All the fibres in the lines are being twisted around and around and it is going to continue to a point where they aren't able to do that any more, which is happening from the canopy inflated and spreading them apart. Which is why they separate around the point of going through the holes in the grommets. The amount of twists in the lines, which there is a nice amount of really tight ones judging from the photo, means the distance of the twists above and below are going to be greater. What this picture tells to me is that the line twists happened early on in the inflation. This is because the slider is still fairly high up the lines and a distance above the line twists. It didn't have enough spreading force to bring it and it probably stopped there from overcoming gravity and air resistance. I would say that these twists were a cause of something around the deployment stage of things. You can actually do a simulation of this on the ground with the help of a few people spreading a canopy out and twisting it up. Or if you are real lucky you can twist it up and try to inflate in on a windy day. From my experience and knowledge with things like this, it doesn't look out of the ordinary IMHO.

You are right, you are within your own right to say you want a CYPRES because of your experience with Vigil but that is that not the question I posed to you. You said My question was because of your single experience with this product should we all disregard the 1000's of cases of it working and happy customers? I would like an answer to this specific question not something I didn't ask. Don't beat around the bush and go in a different direction of what is asked if you intend on attempting to answer this because it just wastes everyones time. Your opinion of the product is clear and it doesn't need to be restated.

Here is what you posted in this thread so far. The only thing you have said is because of service bulletins and recalls, which says nothing about the problems that you were facing with your units. So instead of telling people to read your posts maybe you should read what you have written because you have said absolutely nothing but bash a product with nothing concrete to back it up. Which IMO does nothing to contribute to this thread or any future people reading it. Just because you had problems with something doesn't mean the product line is bad. Have you ever taken Tylenol for a headache and you still had the headache. Well if that has happened ever to anyone then by your reasoning Tylenol doesn't work and no one should use it. That one instance should ultimately overrule 1000's of instances of something working right? Just like you are saying here with Vigil right?

I have done it many times, over the last two or three years. I would have to dig into my log book for the exact dates. Sled, Delta II, PC and Thunderbow in one day. The sled was a rough landing.

The way I did it is make friends with someone overseas that has access to one and then buy it off them. They are a nice canopy to fly and much more stable than the single keel dactyl.

I have seen a system for static line that consisted of a small capewell riser with d-rings connected in the plane via a shot and a half release. The static line would connect to one of the d-rings and if the jumper was hung up, the jumpmaster could connect a reserve to the other d-ring and then release the whole system from the plane. It was quite a slick little setup and was invented by the person around the late 60's to early 70's. The setup in the video is a little different, the idea has been used and around for some time. Very cool to see it used in action.

Can someone please explain to me what is the problem with the Trac-II? I know what many people think is the problem and if someone chooses to give me that answer I will correct them on it. I guess no one wants to mention it. The Trac-II's didn't really have a problem. The only issue they had which was was rubber bands deteriorating with brass grommets, which happened on many rigs. The Green Star rig that came before it. Had the problem with shoulder pad stitching and people removing it causing the harness to fail. This rig was called the Green Star Express. The Trac-IIs are built like a modern harness in respect to how the reserve riser is sewn to the harness. If there is a problem with it, then there is issues with everything out there. I have owned two Trac-IIs and this thing has been mentioned a couple of times to me confusing the two rigs. I will post photos of my Trac-II if people would like.

Can someone please explain to me what is the problem with the Trac-II? I know what many people think is the problem and if someone chooses to give me that answer I will correct them on it.

All I was saying is that you don't have to be old to know these. Granted many newer riggers may not know the material but I am a newer rigger, within this decade and I knew them. That is all I am saying and you can take myself as the point, newer rigger and knew the material. I hear what you are saying about round reserves and many want. Frankly with how the CSPA system is, many won't get their two pin or pop-top rating either. They really are more of a reserve packer than a rigger. But that is just my opinion. I pack a lot of rounds every year which I am sure you know. I have all my ratings and soon will have my rigger b as well. Especially since I am and have done all the work anyways. But that is not the standard progression of most of the rigger a's in Canada. Really if they don't want to learn this stuff it is to their detriment. I have had so many great opportunities that I would never have had if I didn't know what I know about rounds and other shaped parachutes than ramairs.

The rigger doesn't have to be old to know this stuff. Though it is probably more common with the older ones know. I just say this because I am not an old rigger and I knew about the areas mentioned in the poll. But I mainly deal with older gear pre-80s. The newer stuff I would look up when and if I had to pack one of those rigs. The older stuff is in in my parachute library that I revisit pretty often. Some of the issues of the vintage gear isn't worth bringing up in my opinion.

One of the first questions I always get when I bring out some vintage gear to any dropzone is do you flare it for landing. People may do that because of what they see, I guess what I am saying is that study was invalid on many levels because there were many errors with how it was done, the conclusions it made and the overall process, other than the one I pointed out.

I have a couple of problems with your post. Most of it is pretty good and I agree with but one point I do not and the other I have additional information on. First point: I doubt it is because of the instructors being lazy. I think it is more about the DZOs or those higher up in the DZ because of all this fear of liability that has occurred in CSPA. The liability things come up all the time and on the CSPA forums, insurance and the defence fund is still a recent topic. I believe that many dropzones are sucked in this we need squares to not be liable. Second: This doesn't really make your case cause if you know what training they get you will realize a lot. Most of the time the people training the pilots have very little knowledge and many of them have never jumped. I sat in one of these briefs two years ago and their was much to be desired and never during it did they mention about flaring. Since there is such a small amount of pilots that actually use the chutes and the study never checked to see those who have had civilian training makes that study a little useless and invalid. Just my thoughts and opinions. The rest I thought was good.

Raven II = 218 sq. ft. Raven I = 181 sq. ft.

I have no doubt that if you felt that the canopy was not in your control or unsure about it, you did the right thing with cutting it away. Things look different when they are happening in real time. You survived through the whole thing so it is all good. I probably would have handled it different, but that really doesn't matter in this situation. I would ask you to reevaluate what you said in a earlier post. Regardless of how fast it came out this time, it doesn't mean it will come out as fast or for that matter slower the next time. Saying that you would/could take it down a bit further is not necessary and will only build a false sense of confidence if you get away with it. Just my thoughts, take from it what you will.

In psychology research, we call this questionable analogies. Comparing situations that are quite different in an attempt to understand. It pretty much never gives you the answer you want.

The no other problems to date is the big thing that would make me not suspect anything else. However, being a new canopy doesn't mean there is no problems with it. Not saying this is the case here, just mentioning it mainly for others that are reading and may be having issues with a newer canopy. I have personally caught a couple of canopies that were brand new that weren't manufactured to spec. Which include crows feet on the ribs not being sewn in the seam, suspension line attachment points sewn in asymmetrical places on the canopies, ribs larger than others, lines not to spec and a few other things. This whole thing may be just a strange and one time occurrence as well. One of my Safire's that I have put hundreds of jumps on, on one jump knocked me out and ended up splitting me open in a few spots. It usually snivels for about 1100 - 1300 ft if there is no riser or toggle input during opening. It has never done anything close to that again and was packed the same way it was always packed and by the same person, myself.

This might not be relevant but I feel it is worth asking. Have you checked the trim of the canopy? I knew someone with a Sabre 1 that was out of trim and it opened up so hard it broke three ribs. Once it was relined, it opened fine. If one toggle was pulled through and the other was fine, I could believe it could also be caused be asymmetrical inflation. I am not implying this is the case here but I watched one person dump with a shoulder low and it ended up with him in the hospital with a cracked vertebrae. It could be caused more than the slider moving away from the stops.

Right on, glad this has been said. I have been holding back posting on this thread because I have been getting so pissed off at the OP's attitude. I am 213 lbs, taken out my knees 4 times and I jump everything from a 109 up and rounds, lots of rounds. I am tired hearing about all the crap and the poor me attitude also.